DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under
37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/31/2026 has been entered.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Status
Claims 7 and 8 have been canceled.
Claim 15 has been newly added.
Claims 1-6 and 9-15 are pending and examined as follows:
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “conductive member” in claim 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The written specification defines the conductive member as a plate shape formed of a material having good conductivity (paragraph 0099, lines 1-2).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1,2,4-6,9,10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shioi et al (US 4,245,146) in view of Nishigakiet et al (JP2014054935A).
With regards to claim 1, Shioi et al discloses a heater element for heating a vehicle interior (heating element made of PTC ceramic material, Title), comprising a pillar shaped honeycomb structure portion (ceramic body 10 having channels 12 bounded by the partition parts 11, Fig. 2,3) having: an outer peripheral wall (outside wall of channels 12 constituted by an outside partition partsl 11, Fig. 3); and partition walls arranged on an inner side of the outer peripheral wall (partition parts 11 on the inner side of channels 12, Fig. 3), the partition walls defining a plurality of cells (channels 12 constitute a plurality of cells, Fig. 3), each of the cells forming a flow path from a first end face to a second end face (Fig. 2), wherein the outer peripheral wall and the partition walls comprise a material containing barium titanate as a main component and having PTC (Positive Temperature Coefficient) characteristics (ceramic body 10 is made of ceramic materials made of BaO and Tio2 which together make barium titanate, abstract, lines 7-14, col 1, lines 9-12), wherein the outer peripheral wall and the partition walls comprise a material having a Curie point of 150 °C or less (Curie point should be in the range of from 140 °C to 210°C, col 2, lines 40-43).
Shioi et al does not disclose wherein the heater element further comprises a dense insulating film that covers at least a part of the pillar shaped honeycomb structure portion.
Nishigakiet et al discloses wherein the heater element further comprises a dense insulating film that covers at least a part of the pillar shaped honeycomb structure portion (an insulating layer having a dielectric breakdown strength of 10 to 1000 V/μm on the surface of the partition wall 1 of the honeycomb structure portion 4, paragraph 0041, lines 1-3).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Shioi et al and Nishigakiet et al before him or her, to modify the heating element of Shioi et al with the insulating film of Nishigakiet et al in order to prevent an increase in pressure loss in the honeycomb structure portion while maintaining a low thermal resistance.
With regards to claim 2, Nishigakiet et al teaches wherein the insulating film has an average thickness of 100 μm or less (thickness of the insulating layer is preferably 10 μm or less, paragraph 0051, lines 8-10).
With regards to claim 4, Nishigakiet et al teaches wherein surfaces of the flow paths is covered with the insulating film (an insulating layer having a dielectric breakdown strength of 10 to 1000 V/μm on the surface of the partition wall 1 of the honeycomb structure portion 4, paragraph 0041, lines 1-3).
With regards to claim 5, Nishigakiet et al teaches wherein the partition walls have an average thickness of 0.13 mm or less (the partition wall thickness of the honeycomb structure portion was within the range of 0.05 to 0.5 mm, paragraph 0093, lines 1-2).
With regards to claim 6, Nishigakiet et al teaches wherein the heater has a cell density of 93 cells/cm2 or less (heaters in which the cell density was within the range of 9.3 to 186 cells/cm2, paragraph 0093, lines 1-2).
With regards to claim 9, Nishigakiet et al discloses electrode layers on surfaces of the outer peripheral wall and the partition walls on the first end face and the second end face (electrode layers 21 on a first and second end of honeycomb structure 4, Fig. 2).
With regards to claim 10, Nishigakiet et al discloses wherein a conductive member connectable to an external power source is arranged on at least a part of the electrode layers, and wherein the conductive member and the electrode layer are electrically connected to each other (pair of electrode portions 21 and 21 may have a terminal portion 22 for securing an electrical connection with a power source or the like, pages 4, lines 26-27).
With regards to claim 15, Shioi et al discloses wherein the outer peripheral wall has a thickness of 1.0 mm or less (thickness of partition parts 11 of the ceramic body was .2 mm wherein the outer partition parts 11 constitute an outer peripheral wall, col 5, lines 30-35, Fig. 3).
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shioi et al and Nishigakiet et al as applied in claim 1 above, in view of Heimann et al (US 6,888,109).
With regards to claim 3, Shioi et al and Nishigakiet et al does not teach wherein the insulating film has a porosity of 5% or less.
Heimann et al teaches wherein the insulating film has a porosity of 5% or less (insulation has a porosity of 3% by volume, col 3, lines 22-25).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings Shioi et al, Nishigakiet et al and Heimann et al before him or her, to modify the insulating film of Shioi et al and Nishigakiet et al to include the porosity of insulating film of Heimann et al because the combination allows for lower susceptibility of cracking.
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shioi et al and Nishigakiet et al as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Bruck (US2008/0217315A1).
With regards to claim 11, Shioi et al and Nishigakiet et al does not teach wherein at least a part of the electrode layers and conductive member is covered with the insulating film.
Bruck teaches wherein at least a part of the electrode layers and conductive member is covered with the insulating film (power distribution structure 2 is covered with insulating pins 10 and conductor 14 is covered with insulating device 13, Fig. 2).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Shioi et al, Nishigakiet et al and Bruck before him or her, to modify the electrode and conductive member of Shioi et al and Nishigakiet et al to include the insulating layer of Bruck because the combination allows for increased protection of parts of a heating apparatus.
Claim(s) 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shioi et al in view of Nishigakiet et al in view of Shimasaki et al (US 6,112,519).
With regards to claim 12, Shioi et al discloses a heater element for heating a vehicle interior (heating element made of PTC ceramic material, Title), comprising a pillar shaped honeycomb structure portion (ceramic body 10 having channels 12 bounded by the partition parts 11, Fig. 2,3) having: an outer peripheral wall (outside wall of channels 12, Fig. 3); and partition walls arranged on an inner side of the outer peripheral wall (partition parts 11 on the inner side of channels 12, Fig. 3), the partition walls defining a plurality of cells (channels 12 constitute a plurality of cells, Fig. 3), each of the cells forming a flow path from a first end face to a second end face (Fig. 2), wherein the outer peripheral wall and the partition walls comprise a material containing barium titanate as a main component and having PTC (Positive Temperature Coefficient) characteristics (ceramic body 10 is made of ceramic materials made of BaO and Tio2 which together make barium titanate, abstract, lines 7-14, col 1, lines 9-12), wherein the outer peripheral wall and the partition walls comprise a material having a Curie point of 150 °C or less (Curie point should be in the range of from 140 °C to 210°C, col 2, lines 40-43).
Shioi et al does not disclose wherein the heater element further comprises a dense insulating film that covers at least a part of the pillar shaped honeycomb structure portion.
Nishigakiet et al discloses wherein the heater element further comprises a dense insulating film that covers at least a part of the pillar shaped honeycomb structure portion (an insulating layer having a dielectric breakdown strength of 10 to 1000 V/μm on the surface of the partition wall 1 of the honeycomb structure portion 4, paragraph 0041, lines 1-3).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Shioi et al and Nishigakiet et al before him or her, to modify the heating element of Shioi et al with the insulating film of Nishigakiet et al in order to prevent an increase in pressure loss in the honeycomb structure portion while maintaining a low thermal resistance.
Shioi et al and Nishigakiet et al does not teach an inflow pipe for communicating an outside air introduction portion or the vehicle interior with the first end face of the heater element for heating the vehicle interior; a battery for applying voltage to the heater element for heating the vehicle interior; and an outflow pipe for communicating the second end face of the heater element for heating the vehicle interior with the vehicle interior.
Shimasaki et al teaches an inflow pipe for communicating an outside air introduction portion or the vehicle interior with the first end face of the heater element (cone shaped portion 6 serves as a inflow pipe for communicating an outside air with a first end of EHC unit 104, Fig. 1); a battery for applying voltage to the heater element (battery Vb to provide voltage to EHC unit 104, Fig. 1); and an outflow pipe for communicating the second end face of the heater element (exhaust pipe 101, Fig. 1).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Shioi et al, Nishigakiet et al and Shimasaki et al before him or her, to modify the heater of Shioi et al and Nishigakiet et al to include the duct of Shimasaki et al because the combination allows for enhanced heating capacity in a vehicle heating system.
With regards to claims 13 and 14, Shioi et al, Nishigakiet et al and Shimasaki et al does not teach wherein the heater for heating the vehicle interior is a heater for heating a vehicle interior having a steam compression heat pump configured as a main heating device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was made to have a use for the heater of Shioi et al, Nishigakiet et al and Shimasaki et al, since the patented structure of Shioi et al, Nishigakiet et al and Shimasaki et al describes the structure limited for a heater. Selecting a specific configuration where the heater is used for would amount to a recitation of the intended use of the patented invention, without resulting in any structural difference between the claimed invention and the structure disclosed by Shioi et al, Nishigakiet et al and Shimasaki et al, and therefore fails to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967) and In re Otto, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants arguments: Applicant argues the prior art does not disclose the amended limitations of claim 1.
Examiners response: Applicant amended claim 1 to include “wherein the outer peripheral wall and the partition walls comprise a material containing barium titanate as a main component”. Shioi et al discloses the outer peripheral wall and the partition walls comprise a material containing barium titanate as a main component and having PTC (Positive Temperature Coefficient) characteristics (ceramic body 10 is made of ceramic materials made of BaO and Tio2 which together make barium titanate, abstract, lines 7-14, col 1, lines 9-12). Nishigaki was used as the primary reference in previous rejections and now is being used as a secondary reference to better reject the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS JOHN WARD whose telephone number is (571)270-1786. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7am - 4pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, EDWARD LANDRUM can be reached at 5712725567. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/THOMAS J WARD/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/JOHN J NORTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights